I feel so sorry for this young soldier, she must have felt so much pressure that she just could not handle it.
Rather off topic, but... JB, I read somewhere that she was an LDS member. |
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 1089 100%
I guess none of this makes a difference now. In a row, three things happened, the third making no sense with the rest. 1. Amnesty International put out a report that the abuse in Iraq was even worse now than before. 2. The courts determined that the torture in Iraq was in gross violation of the Geneva convention. 3. Republicans sent a bill to Bush who singed it, that allows any torture that doesn't kill a person or result in amputation. It says that the president defines torture, gives him exclusive rights to interpret the geneva convention, gives him exclusive rights to determine if the geneva convention was broken, allows him to order or allow secret kidnappings without charge or trial to anyone defined as a terrorist via the Patriot Act (13b defines americans as terrorists). So the prisoners are now out of luck, our people can do what ever the presidents little heart desires.
At this stage in the game, any armed combatant captured in Iraq is not a lawful combatant. This means that they are not protected under the Geneva convention, and the US military could line them all up against a wall and shoot them if they felt like it. The fact that the US has not done this should get the US some credit.
I would think that not shooting them would be the baseline for minimal accepted behavior internationally and we would work our way up the credit tree from there. At this point, there is no credit for the US on this no matter how it goes. Should the US and Co. succeed in bringing democracy to Iraq, people will only point toward the lack of WMD's or terrorist ties. Should the US and Co. fail in bringing democracy to Iraq, people will only point and say..."told you so". The only thing that is being decided is how much "egg" will be worn by the US and Co.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 863 86.3%
I have been looking for this information and had thought this was the case...
https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_...ecruits_waivers
With every step the US makes in a foreign land being scrutinized, it really needs to have its best people there carrying out the instructions from the top brass down the the lowliest private. I do hope that the boot camp experience that these convicted felons change their ways, but I am concerned that this is a significant part of the reason we are having such horrid behavior on the part of a small percentage of our troops. I would be very interested in if some of the soldiers that have carried out horrible acts in iraq were actually waiver recipients.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 863 86.3%
It's no secret the US Army specifically targets lower socio-economic areas. I"ve seen several documentaries and reports that have illustrated this. This inevitably leads to troops who have had less stable upbringings than others.
The reality is, if you go to areas where kids are better educated and have a better quality of life then you will not have as much success finding soldiers. Who really wants to risk their life for some of these foolish wars?
The Iraq conflict has killed over 3,000 US troops for absolutely nothing. Iraq is in a much worse condition today than in its recent history. So how are you going to recruit potential soldiers who might be aware of this failure? You don't. You target people who are unlikely to question motives or try to understand a conflict before engaging.
Unfortunately the minority of soldiers who commit war crimes tarnish the name for the rest. But if you are desperate for numbers, as the US military constantly is, then you will not screen people as well as you perhaps should. And let's face it, with such a massive Army there will always be a few bad apples. That is the case in just about every occupation I know of.
International Level: Negotiator / Political Participation: 453 45.3%
Broadcast Exclusive: Abu Ghraib Whistleblower Samuel Provance Speaks Out on Torture and Cover-Up at U.S. Military Jail
In a national TV broadcast exclusive, we spend the hour with Abu Ghraib whistleblower and former Army Sergeant Samuel Provance. From September 2003 to the spring of 2004 Provance ran the top-secret computer network used by military intelligence at Abu Ghraib. He was the first intelligence specialist to speak openly about abuse at the prison and is the only military intelligence soldier listed as a witness in the Taguba report. Among the abuses he lists is the torture of a sixteen-year-old Iraqi boy in order to make his father talk. After Provance spoke out, the Army stripped him of his security clearance, demoted him and threatened him with ten years in jail.
Ref. https://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/25/broa...sive_abu_ghraib